As I began the ideation process and reflected upon the initial drafts of my research paper, I noticed a need for more thorough investigation of existing technological solutions as interventions for ASD. I found a thorough review of efficacy of existing technologies, which I have used in combination with my own observations to analyze the use of technologies that fall in line with one of the two threads that emerged in the process of writing my paper: holistic interventions that use the body as a multi-directional medium for communication and interventions that quantify complex social interactions.

I also realized the necessity of clarifying and solidifying my position on the research. With a clearly defined perspective on assistive technology for ASD, I will be better able to direct the development of assistive/adaptive solutions. But as an individual with little authority on the subject, I found it difficult to firmly state my position, so I chose to reframe my topic from an artist's perspective by viewing interventions for ASD through a lens of rigid and fluid structures. I am still in the process of developing this reframe in the paper, and I will discuss it further with advisers before I fully commit the change. My goal for this paper was to reorder the sections of the existing paper to be consistent with the outline I dreamed up last week, then to pull information from sources to generate at least some text in each of the sections. After I confirm the direction of the paper, I will comb through the paper section by section in a linear way to ensure a smooth flow and clear communication of ideas.

It is also relevant to note a few substantial developments in the "getting out of your head" department. I attended a panel discussion on ASD with self-advocates last Friday, and I will be interviewing ASD advocate Jesse Saperstein tomorrow. I have also spoken to Professor Winslow Burleson about his work with assistive technology at NYU-X. He is interested in advising me on my thesis, and I need to discuss the details with him further as this may involve working on existing projects in his lab. I would like to discuss all of this with Katherine before moving forward.

Here is a summary of my notes from the panel discussion on Friday:

I found the Friday panel really moving and interesting. I was surprised by a lot of elements:

• 1. I have read blogs by individuals with sensory processing issues and seen videos, so I had some idea of what to expect, but I was surprised how distracting I found one of the panelist's behavior at times. It was interesting to watch the audience ignore some of the more disruptive things he was doing (some of which in a different context were like a 1970s comedy sketch- when he took the first speaker's notes). Is there a difference between accepting and ignoring? At the same time, I was surprised by some of his social interactions. It was beautiful to watch him show support and connect with the other advocates, his Occupational Therapist, and his mother, nonverbally.
• 2. I was surprised how funny one of the panelists was, and really moved by a lot of his insights. I was also surprised how much he talked about dating/crushes/attractions; he seemed to have experienced a lot of pain/struggle in that area. He didn't seem to quite understand the perspectives of the neurotypical women with whom he has interacted, which I understand is part of Asperger's. I think I was struck by the conflict in maturity between his insights and his limited perspective in that department.
• 3. Each of the self-advocates apologized at least once during his presentation. I think this speaks to the state of expectations governing interactions between the Autistic and neurotypical worlds.
• 4. All of the self-advocates were men. Nearly everyone else were women.
• 5. A resounding theme was the necessity of patience and non-linear understanding of process/progress in interventions and relationships with people on the spectrum.
• 6. Strategies of incrementally backing away when not able to let something go.
• 7. All of the advocates mentioned learning to use the strengths of their unique minds to their advantage.
• 8. One panelist advocated a 3 strikes policy: "you're an adult first and a person with a disability second." Empowering.
• 9. Discussion of being told about diagnosis: how and when should people be told they are Autistic?

For my thesis, I had been thinking I wanted to create something for teens and adults to function more easily in neurotypical school and work environments, but it kind of seems like that may not be appropriate. It would be great to talk to some of the advocates about what (if anything) would be helpful.

Here is the New Outline as a PDF, though I honestly prefer the hand-written version on the page entitled Pivot.

Here is the Next Draft as a PDF.